Welcome

Welcome to the POZ Community Forums, a round-the-clock discussion area for people with HIV/AIDS, their friends/family/caregivers, and
others concerned about HIV/AIDS. Click on the links below to browse our various forums; scroll down for a glance at the most recent posts; or join in the
conversation yourself by registering on the left side of this page.

Privacy Warning: Please realize that these forums are open to all, and are fully searchable via Google and other search engines. If you are HIV positive
and disclose this in our forums, then it is almost the same thing as telling the whole world (or at least the World Wide Web). If this concerns you, then do not use a
username or avatar that are self-identifying in any way. We do not allow the deletion of anything you post in these forums, so think before you post.

The information shared in these forums, by moderators and members, is designed to complement, not replace, the relationship between an individual and his/her own
physician.

All members of these forums are, by default, not considered to be licensed medical providers. If otherwise, users must clearly define themselves as such.

Forums members must behave at all times with respect and honesty. Posting guidelines, including time-out and banning policies, have been established by the moderators
of these forums. Click here for “Am I Infected?” posting guidelines. Click here for posting guidelines pertaining to all other POZ community forums.

We ask all forums members to provide references for health/medical/scientific information they provide, when it is not a personal experience being discussed. Please
provide hyperlinks with full URLs or full citations of published works not available via the Internet. Additionally, all forums members must post information which are
true and correct to their knowledge.

There will be so much prestige and financial reward for the person (s) team company that find this cure. Its just a matter of time. were learning more all the time. and now we know more than ever before.

At this moment we must focus on being well and optimistic and know that there are doctors and scientists working on this!!

I've asked 3 medical professionals this question and 2 of them avoided answering me the questions and said " there are very good treatments available now and better one's will come out soon, we now even have Atripla, once a day pill, something that was unimanigable in the 80's"

the Optimistic doctor told me "Absolutely, there are doctors/researchers/scientist working around the clock all over the world trying to find a cure. Hopefully it will come in our life-time but a cure is almost certain"

I'm not sure if there will be an absolute cure (absolutely no HIV anywhere in the body), but I'd like to think that there'll be a therapeutic vaccine that will turn HIV into an inactive condition, much like chicken pox or mononucleosis (once you get it, the virus is always in your body, but it's usually not doing anything because it's under control). This would mean that HIV would be controlled without the need for daily medications and frequent blood tests.

I just tested positive Dec. 2006 and as much as I would like to believe that there will be a cure someday, I don't see it happening. I'm not trying to burst anyones bubble of hope, but if you look at the history of this and other "MANAGEABLE" diseases you will see that it is not in the best interest for the pharmaceutical companies or big government to find a cure. It is more profitable for all to find something to maintain someones health and keep them on it. I'm taking Atripla which runs about $1450.00 a month, multiply that times the number of people infected and ask yourself, "Are the pharmaceutical companies willing to give up that much profit?", we are talking BILLIONS of dollars here. Look how long diabetes has been a "MANAGEABLE" disease, but to this day no cure has been found. As for our government, look back at the history of how this disease was handled. As long as it was killing minorities and gay people, our government did not give a damn. It was only when the disease went "mainstream", attacking "normal" straight people, that our government decided that it was time to start looking for a "cure".

Maybe it's just me and I still have a lot of issues to deal with finding out my status so recently, but I don't have much faith in our government or the corporations that "run" it that anyone other than those infected truly want to find a cure. There is too much money to be lost on finding a cure.

I truly hope I am wrong and that a cure will be found before it's too late for me, but I have come to terms that I will die from AIDS.

You also have to keep in mind that this is a SEXUALLY infectious disease there and it is growing amongst hetereosexual in a fast pace. Every 5 seconds someone in this world is getting infected with HIV in the world. The virus is mutating and they are realizing HAART is not as effective as it once was. There is an incentive to stop the spread of AIDS because it no longer discriminates or considered "gay disease". Companies also make HUGE amounts of money on the stock, if the company finds a cure or a better therapy than HAART they will be making lots of money from stock and prestige.

I just tested positive Dec. 2006 and as much as I would like to believe that there will be a cure someday, I don't see it happening. I'm not trying to burst anyones bubble of hope, but if you look at the history of this and other "MANAGEABLE" diseases you will see that it is not in the best interest for the pharmaceutical companies or big government to find a cure. It is more profitable for all to find something to maintain someones health and keep them on it. I'm taking Atripla which runs about $1450.00 a month, multiply that times the number of people infected and ask yourself, "Are the pharmaceutical companies willing to give up that much profit?", we are talking BILLIONS of dollars here. Look how long diabetes has been a "MANAGEABLE" disease, but to this day no cure has been found. As for our government, look back at the history of how this disease was handled. As long as it was killing minorities and gay people, our government did not give a damn. It was only when the disease went "mainstream", attacking "normal" straight people, that our government decided that it was time to start looking for a "cure".

Maybe it's just me and I still have a lot of issues to deal with finding out my status so recently, but I don't have much faith in our government or the corporations that "run" it that anyone other than those infected truly want to find a cure. There is too much money to be lost on finding a cure.

I truly hope I am wrong and that a cure will be found before it's too late for me, but I have come to terms that I will die from AIDS.

You may be right...it's not in the best interest of big pharmaceutical companies and our government to come up with a cure at this very moment.... but it is certainly an interest to our government if the elected officials are more liberal.

What about other countries other than the US?? If not the US, other countries will find a cure one way or another. If the US claims they are as great as they are, they would not want to lose the race to find a cure. Think about it this way, China is viewed by many as a rising power....and if they could add an HIV cure or a cure for diabetes to their resume, it would be a slap in the face for the US.

Also, what about the small pharmaceutical companies?? If one of the small pharmaceutical companies come up with a cure, their profit would sky rocket exponentially.

Don't forget about researches around the Universities, not just the ones in the US, but all the Universities worldwide are all conducting research to find a cure for HIV, Diabetes, etc.

We also have people like Bill Gates funding HIV research. It seems to me he is determined to come up with some sort of vaccine to halt the disease. He has no interests in the Pharmaceutical business.

the cure and new treatments has very little to do with big pharmaceutical companies and our government, it has nothing to do with anyone trying to stop anything, perhaps there could be more money for research but there has been billions for decades, they have discovered so much, many studies are being done, every week new breakthrus

it has to do with millions of scientists worldwide who are brilliant and want to win the nobel prize

in san diego alone there are 500 small tiny biotech companies that have nothing to do with big pharmaceutical companies

these small companies and scientists and bizmen in them make many huge discoveriesand they are all competing with each other

the body is complex

the hiv virus has been studied and the epidemic and gays huge activism, marches in 80s 90s and protest have forced giant changes at fda and drug trials etc

there is no giant govt org. trying to stop thousands of individual scientists in thier labs all over world from coming up with cure, they are so so close in so many areas

i have read articles for 9 months and the human genenom which only just got read and understood is making huge discoveries on how hiv works and how to treat

yes there is a cure or easier treatment coming in future

read any of these google searches, read my posts links above

trim5-alpha

gene therapy

cd8 new meds related to pd-1 anti-pd-1 and effect on hiv

There are a multitude of tools to apply to this goal, including small interfering RNA, iRNA, passive cellular immune augmentation, therapeutic vaccination, stem cell biology, cellular activation with combinations of more-selective ligands – as well as combinations of these approaches

http://www.virxsys.com/pages/human-therapies/first-clinical-application/how-vrx496-works.php Gene Therapy Shows Promise Against HIVGene-base therapy may be effective against HIV, U.S. researchers report.An investigational gene-based immunotherapy called VRX496 suggests it can fight the virus, according to a phase I, open-label, non-randomized clinical trial conducted at the University of Pennsylvania"This is an important milestone in the development of what we believe will be the next-generation of HIV therapy," reports Riku Rautsola, Ph.D., president and CEO of VIRxSYS

i voted for a cure in the next 5 or so years, but when i think of a cure what i really think of is either a therapeutic vaccine with less reliance on daily meds or alternatively meds with few/no side effects so it would just be like taking a vitamin tablet everyday lol, i might still be infectious but that would be good enough for me.

ga1964, i know and truly understand how much your hurting..we all here have been there and many of us still are learning to deal with this diagnoses. But, my Infectious Disease doctor who is very much respected and known to be one of the top in his field, told me that i'd probably die of heart disease or diabiates before surcoming to hiv/aids.so,as long as you take and stick to your meds regimen, DONT MISS A DOSE. you can live a normal life span.

I voted for a cure in the next 5 years, but I think that's being pretty optimistic. The main barrier at the moment to eradicating HIV from the body is the persistence of viral reservoirs in parts of the body that HIV meds cannot reach, and the fact that the virus goes dormant inside immune cells that persist for decades.

I think there's some interesting work being done, but frankly, a cure is very much a peripheral concern for people in medicine. I think that the urgency to develop a cure has dropped now that HIV has largely been converted into a chronic condition. I worry that when they have a vaccine to protect negative people that urgency will disappear entirely. They'll let the 40 million or so African who have it die out and those of us in the developed world continue to feed Big Pharma's pockets with our expensive life-long meds.

If you look at where the research money is going, it's going into prevention - microbicides and preventative vaccines. And also better drugs for those of us with HIV. The American Foundation for AIDS research (amFAR) allocated only $1.5 million in July 2006 to studies looking at the eradication of HIV from the body:

This is a one-off. These studies were termed "bold" by one of the grantees, and made front page news on AIDSMAP. Not enough. For me, pessimism isn't really an option. I was 26 when I was infected and according to a recent Danish study can expect to live about another 40 years on meds - so I'm in it for the long haul, like I hope everybody on here. Seeing a cure sooner rather than later is going to make a big difference to my quality of life in the long run. I'm increasingly thinking that HIVers are going to have to fund this stuff themselves. We're living longer, and are able to work: why is there no DEDICATED charity for us to contribute to that funnels funding to researchers interested in pursuing eradication? Researchers go where the money is, and there are enough of us - if every HIV+ person in the states gave $10 a year, there's $10,000,000. Add in Western Europe and there's $17,500,000 a year. More than big pharma is spending. Personally, if there was such a charity, I'd donate 10% of my income to it until it was over.

I've looked on the net, and there's nothing like this. If there's anybody in the UK who's good with websites/charity law/accounting and wants to set this up with me, PM me. If there's anybody in the States who wants to set up an office over there in co-ordination this would be such a cool thing to do.

Finding a cure to HIV/AIDS doesn't have to do with funding or research but they just simply can't find methods for it to stop evolving at such a fast pace without medication. As long as they find alternatives to HAART such as therapeutic vaccines and less toxic drugs that don't have to be taking every single day we will have a better quality of life. Living on HAART for the rest of our lives is not having a high quality of life because in the long run these drugs will kill us. We need to have a therapy that is less toxic to our bodies because living longer years but having to live with the consequences of HAART seems pretty awful to me.

Sorry to pop anyone's balloon here, but I know of three pharmaceutical companies working on a cure. So quit with the back-of-the-envelope nonsense about them not wanting to do it.

Logged

NB. Any advice about HIV is given in addition to your own medical advice and not intended to replace it. You should never make clinical decisions based on what anyone says on the internet but rather check with your ID doctor first. Discussions from the internet are just that - Discussions. They may give you food for thought, but they should not direct you to do anything but fuel discussion.

All of these attack the virus at different points in its lifecycle and any one of these could be the next breakthrough treatment. Twenty years of scientific work and billions of dollars are paying off in the HIV treatment area bringing hope to sufferers.

My personal favorite is the ATM inhibitor, it also stops you from using the ATM, LOL

I think it depends how you would define a cure really. If you mean a complete eradication of the virus from the body with the person then becoming HIV- I think you are talking a loooooong long time away if ever. If you mean a theraputic vaccine which meant the body could control the virus itself without the need for any medication then i'd like to think that could be reachable in the next 10-15 years. It all depends on how the investment into research develops. There is still so much we don't know about the virus yet.

I don't think there can be such a thing as a "resistance proof med". Any drug with activity against HIV is going to force the virus to mutate in a certain direction to escape the control of that drug. It's just natural selection. And HIV is very mutable.

More realistically I hope to see 1st, 2nd, 3rd... etc, line therapies that are easy to take, and have a low side-effect profile.

It would be great to see a therapeutic vaccine, but I read in an article that even a highly effective therapeutic vaccine would only delay the start to medications by 3 years.

I think what we really need is a cure. My hope is on radioimmunotherapy and valproic acid (even having looked at the recent negative article). I hope that we will be able to treat HIV like we do some forms of lymphoma, and aim for cure. I think 2008 will be a crunch year - with vaccine trial results, another valproic acid study finishing (the follow-up to the Margolis study in 2005) and hopefully some human trials of radioimmunotherapy.

i just got back from being interviewed for virixus. excluded cause i had ks in the past<i just cant get a break> i got a detail break down of the program. by no means is it a cure. 1st thing they tell ya when ya get there. but it is promising as a therepy.

It would be great to see a therapeutic vaccine, but I read in an article that even a highly effective therapeutic vaccine would only delay the start to medications by 3 years.

Maybe? Maybe not? We don't know. This reminds me of the late 1990s, when the gloom-and-doom predictors were saying that each HAART combo, even when complied with perfectly, would only be effective for 2-3 years before inevitable drug resistance, and that we'd all be failing entire classes of meds before long. Fortunately, a number of people who have been on their combos for much longer than 2-3 years (sometimes 10 years now!) have disproved that 'inevitable resistance' theory. So perhaps when a therapeutic vaccine becomes available, it'll be more durable and more effective than these naysayers believe.

Maybe. But remember there were also people in the late 90s, like David Ho, who believed that HAART therapies would eradicate HIV over time. Now we know better. I think optimism is more dangerous than pessimism, because some poor bastard will always have to live the worst case scenario.

We also have people like Bill Gates funding HIV research. It seems to me he is determined to come up with some sort of vaccine to halt the disease. He has no interests in the Pharmaceutical business. Justin

Bill Gates and Pharmaceutical biz? PLEASE,,, don't you guys konw he has millions invested in their stock?

as the dissidents call it, "the aids industry" is BIG and encompasses large large section of our society. Basically, it feeds lots and lots of people, not to mention the pharm companies making what 30 billion profit per month!, 30 BILLION!!!!! Do you guys really think any one cure could bring that kind of money?

Bill Gates and Pharmaceutical biz? PLEASE,,, don't you guys konw he has millions invested in their stock?

Bill Gates is not an idiot...why would you not invest in the pharmaceutical companies, he could make $$ off of them....It's one thing to make more money, it's another thing to find a cure. ....but at the same time, he has the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation (non-profit) geared towards health and research for cures. He also donates a lot of $$ to various research institutions that are not pharmaceutical related. What about the recent donation to the new research initiative in Canada?

Pharma Industry is also responsible for meds for cancer and a vaccine for HPV against cervical cancer has been developed. So I don´t think the industry is against finding a cure. In fact all the meds we have today are thanks to Big Pharma.

They must tell you that vrx496 it is not yet a cure.Try to immagine what happen if they tell you that.. YES IT IS A CURE.Milion people is waiting for the magic word " CURE".Let them keep going on... cross the fingers..by

Immune-based therapy will most likely play a major role in fighting HIV in the future. The immunemodulators are designed to help the efforts of one or more of the “arms” of the immune system:antibodies; natural killer cells; killer T cells; and helper T cells. In addition, the immune modulatorsmay also prove effective at flushing out latent virus that may remain hidden in many cells andlymphoid tissues of the body (and virtually undetected in the blood). This reservoir of latent cells isbelieved to be one of the major barriers to completely eliminating HIV from a person’s body.Companies that are currently pursuing various immune therapy strategies include many well-known drug companies including Chiron Corporation (NASDAQ: CHIR); Bayer Corporation(NYSE: BAY); and GlaxoSmithKline (NYSE: GSK).

The goal of developing an HIV vaccine is an area of great interest to scientists and drugmanufacturers alike. Although progress toward a vaccine has been a slow process with numerousfailures in the clinc, in the past few years remarkable strides have been made toward a vaccine forHIV. In the twelve months after June 2003 thirteen vaccine candidates moved into Phase I trials.That’s the highest number of Phase I trials initiated in any single year since the search for avaccine began. A major reason for the increased number of vaccine candidates and the progressionof these candidates is the development of international organizations in support of finding an AIDSvaccine. Many vaccines are currently being tested utilizing recombinant viral vectors, DNA vaccinesand combinations of peptides and lipids to deliver the vaccine. Some researchers anticipate that indeveloping countries between the years 2005 and 2010 some 44,000 people will participate inapproximately five Phase II/B and Phase III trials of AIDS vaccines spanning fifteen countries andsome 52,000 will participate in approximately ten Phase II/B and Phase III Non-vaccine HIVprevention trials, including microbicide trials spanning twelve countries.

Many other novel approaches to attacking HIV are currently in development. These includeintegrase inhibitors which prevent the virus from integrating itself into the genetic code of aninfected cell (Merck Pharmaceutical, NYSE: MRK); maturation inhibitors which prevent the virusfrom maturing, rendering it unable to infect new cells (Panacos Pharmaceuticals); zinc fingerinhibitors which attack HIV’s inner core (Hubriphar); and devices such as Aethlon Medical’s(OTC: AEMD) Hemopurifier™ which may offer exciting adjunct solutions to traditional anti-viraltherapy.These more novel approaches appear to have a lot of potential; however, currentlyscientific data on these mechanisms is often minimal and require more data to determine their longterm safety and efficacy.Finally, the worldwide demand and competition for an effective preventative HIV vaccine is intense.Currently many health organizations as well as drug manufacturers are attempting to usecombinations of vaccine agents to limit the spread of HIV whether it be from person to person orthe prevention of further infection within a patient’s body. Many new vaccine strategies, preventiveand/or therapeutic, that result in production of both anti-HIV antibodies and cytotoxic T-cells(CTLs), are now being pursued. ALVAC vCP1521 by Aventis Pasteur (NYSE: SNY) is apromising vaccine that is delivered in a canarypox virus vector. AIDSVAX B/E by VaxGen Inc.(OTC:VXGN.PK), which is a new formulation of a previously failed vaccine, uses a regulatory HIVprotein as its delivery mechanism. Both AIDSVAX B/E and ALVAC vCP1521 are currently in Phase IIIstudies. AIDSVAX may also serve as an effective booster to other vaccines currently indevelopment.

NEWDIRECTIONS INTREATMENTWith drug resistance undermining the effectiveness of available antiretroviral drugs, AIDS cliniciansare looking toward therapies to expand treatment options and to strengthen the weakening immuneresponse associated with AIDS. These alternative methods of attacking HIV include: EntryInhibitors, which work by preventing HIV from attaching to and entering host cells; and immune-based therapies as a means of correcting immune deficiencies and strengthening the effects of drugtherapy.Many physicians hope this area can be used as adjunctive therapy combined with existing HAART(Highly Active Anti-Retroviral Therapy) to reduce side effects, enhance the efficacy of existingtreatments and delay the progression of the HIV virus. Many of these drugs are still in developmentand represent a new direction for physicians and patients alike to attack HIV’s ability to attach tothe human cell and further along in the infection to prevent the destruction of the immune system.Despite all of the developments and advancements in the field of antiretroviral therapy includingfighting transcription and fusion prevention there are still many problems that exist. Viral reservoirs(brain, spinal fluid), development of drug resistance and the toxic effects seen from manycontemporary drugs all threaten the current antiretroviral regimens. A large majority of HIV-patients are infected with viruses that are currently resistant to one or more classes of antiretroviralagents. Through these concerns there has a grown a desire to find more novel approaches tofighting HIV.7.1 HIV ENTRYINHIBITORSSome antiviral treatments attempt to inhibit viral attachment and thus prevent HIV from enteringthe human cell. Certain parts of the HIV virus attach to certain areas on the human cell. Scientistshope that by targeting these particular sites on both the human cell and the HIV virus they will beable to prevent infection. Most entry inhibitors must be taken by injection because digestive acidswill break them down. Many of the pipeline drugs in this category attack the CCR5 receptor. TheCCR5 receptor helps direct immune cells to damaged or diseased areas of the body. This is how HIVenters and infects T cells. There is a small percentage approximately 10 percent of people ofEuropean decent that have a naturally occurring defect in their CCR5 receptor. In patients with thisdefect HIV is unable to progress at the same rate as in someone without this genetic defect. Theseproducts are known as CCR5 receptor antagonists.

IMMUNE-BASEDTHERAPIES ANDOTHERADJUNCTAPPROACHESThe immune system plays an important role in two important aspects of the HIV infection:determining the baseline concentration of virus in the body and delaying disease progression.Immune modulators are designed to help the efforts of one or more of the so-called armies of theimmune system: antibodies; natural killer cells; killer T-cells (also known as “cytotoxic T-cells”,“CD8 cells”, or “CTLs”); and helper T-cells (also called “CD4 cells”). However, since latent virusremains present in many cells and lymphoid tissues of the body (and virtually undetected in theblood), these cells can persist for a long time, and virus lurking within them can rekindle active HIVinfection. When and if these cells become active, they can begin producing viruses. This reservoirof resting cells is believed to be one of the major barriers to completely eliminating HIV from aperson’s body. It is very likely that the next generation of effective treatments will involveconverting this latent virus into active cells, so that it can be “flushed out” and confronted. That is,once activated, these cells would be subjected to the immune system, immune-based therapies,antiviral drugs and other HIV treatments.IMMUNE-BASEDTHERAPIES INDEVELOPMENTProleukin® (interleukin-2, IL-2) – Chiron Corporation (NasdaqNM: CHIR)Proleukin® is a recombinant form of interleukin-2 (IL-2), a naturally occurring chemical called acytokine, produced by certain cells of the immune system. Cytokines are your body’s own chemicalmessengers that can be manipulated to increase the immune response to HIV. Each cytokine cancarry a different message telling your body how to deal with cells. T-helper cells, a type of whiteblood cell, produce the protein IL-2 when they are stimulated by an infection. IL-2 is known as animmune modulator and serves as a catalyst by multiplying and maturing infection-fighting cells.Interleukin-2 is approved by the FDA to fight cancer but is not yet approved for HIV disease. IL-2works by increasing the number of CD4+ cells through stimulation of the immune system. IL-2 doesnot recover lost types of T-cells but is able to make copies of existing ones. IL-2 shows promise inincreasing T-cells counts especially when it is taken either in intravenous infusion form or as atwice-daily subcutaneous injection every day for 5 days, once every 8 weeks. As the T-countincreases the cycles may occur less frequently. IL-2 must be taken in conjunction with otherantiviral drugs. The most prevalent side effect is capillary leak syndrome which causes weight gain,swelling, low blood pressure, and other problems. IL-2 may also cause mood changes such asirritability and depression. At lower doses IL-2 may reduce the number of neutrophils, a type ofinfection-fighting cell, and may affect the thyroid. There appears to be no major side effects of IL-2, and it will soon enter in Phase III trials. Proleukin® may also be effective at decreasing oreliminating hidden pools of the virus. Currently companies such as Amgen Inc. (NasdaqNM:AMGN) (IL-15), Biotech Inflection Point (IL-7), and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc.(NasdaqNM: REGN) (IL-4, IL-13 trap) are developing other methods for using cytokines to helpfight HIV infection most of which are in Pre-clinical to Phase I studies.52There are multiple immune-based therapies that are currently in production and development:•Bay 50-4798 (interleukin-2) by Bayer Corporation (NYSE: BAY) is in Phase I/II trials. Itconsists of a recombinant form of IL-2. However, Bay 50-4798 does not affect other immunecells like IL-2 does which may reduce the risk of side effects. Bay 50-4798 may have to beinjected twice a day.53•Multikine® by Cel-Sci Corporation (AMEX: CVM) is currently in Phase I/II human trials forthe treatment of cancer; Multikine® is a combination of several different cytokines. Thesecytokines include interleukins, interferons, chemokines and colony-stimulating factors.Multikine® appears to be non-toxic and is able to boost patient’s immune systems. Cel-Scihopes to develop Multikine® for adjuvant treatment in HIV infected individuals.54•Ampligen® by Hemispherx Biopharma (AMEX: HEB), in Phase II trials, is a synthetic RNAmolecule that is able to stimulate the immune system by encouraging it to produce interferon52Chiron Corporation company website: www.chiron.com53Bayer Corporation company website: www.bayer.com54Cel-Sci Corporation company website: www.cel-sci.comPage 3332which activates a cell defenses against viruses. It has minimal side effects including flu-likesymptoms, chest tightness, transient neutropenia and malaise. Ampligen® is available as oraltablets known as Oragens. Oragens are currently in pre-clinical studies.55•Immunitin™ (HE2000) by Hollis-Eden Pharmaceuticals (NasdaqNM: HEPH) targets andattempts to strengthen the “humoral” immune response which is responsible for producingantibodies and therefore fighting HIV infection. This may help reestablish immune systembalance when it is in disrepair. Immunitin™ has shown activity against malaria and tuberculosisas well. HE2000 is currently in Phase I/II trials.56•MDX010 by Medarex Inc. (NasdaqNM: MEDX) is a fully human antibody that fights theCTLA receptor. CTLA-4 is blamed for the suppressed immune response that is associated withHIV infection. By blocking this suppressive activity MDX010 may enhance the anti-HIV immuneresponse and thus allow the body to fight HIV more effectively. It is currently in Phase I/IItesting.

Hemispherx Biopharma, Inc. company website: www.hemispherx.net and the Podell and King Medical Practicewebsite: www.drpodell.org Hollis-Eden Pharmaceuticals company website: www.holliseden.comMedarex, Inc. company website: www.medarex.comALTERNATIVEAPPROACHESWith no end to the AIDS epidemic in sight scientists and drug manufacturers alike have begunsearching for alternative methods to turn the tides on the HIV virus. Because of HIV’s ability todevelop resistance and mutate, the current drugs have been able to only partially stem the tideagainst HIV’s rapid reproduction and infection. Scientists have begun to think “outside the box”when fighting HIV and AIDS. Currently pharmaceutical companies are developing multiple ways ofattacking HIV from filtering the blood through a dialysis machine to attacking the HIV virus’s innercore. Innovative thinking will soon open the door to more novel and effective ways of attacking HIV.The Hemopurifier - Aethlon Medical (OTC BB: AEMD.OB)Researchers from Aethlon Medical have developed a potentially promising extracorporeal entryinhibitor, the Hemopurifier (HIV dialysis). The Hemopurifier , by decreasing viral load, appears tohave a number of attributes necessary for a globally practical therapy for HIV, both as a conjunctiveand salvage therapy. And by removing mutant strains, could extend the life of currently approveddrugs and could represent a valuable lifecycle management strategy. The Hemopurifier is able toclear infectious HIV, gp120 and other related toxins before infection occurs. Also, since theHemopurifier does not cause cross-resistance, and given the new government guidelines thatencourage the delay of initial drug regimens, it may be utilized as a first line therapy, reducing viralload and delaying the need to start antiviral therapy. Aethlon Medical’s dialysis approach could alsorepresent an important adjunct therapy for current dialysis patients that are co-infected with HIV(estimated to be a significant percent of the current kidney dialysis population). Aethlon also hasplans to use the Hemopurifier™ as a treatment countermeasure against drug and vaccine resistantbiological weapons. In one hour of treatment The Hemopurifier™ has cleared 90% of the toxicprotein gp-120, which depletes healthy immune cells.58Aethlon scientists are also researching thecapability of the Hemopurifier to regulate the overproduction of Cytokines, which could improve thetreatment outcomes of both infectious and autoimmune diseases

Azodicarbonamide (ADA) – Hubriphar (H-Phar) – Zinc Finger InhibitorADA is the first zinc finger inhibitor, and it is currently in Phase I/II trials. Zinc fingers refer to thechain of amino acids that hold the nucleocapsid or HIV inner core together. They are involved inbinding and packaging viral DNA. The purpose of zinc finger inhibitors (or zinc ejectors) is to breakapart and destroy these structures preventing the virus from functioning properly. The HIV coredoes not mutate so drugs targeting them could last a long time, however, zinc fingers are not onlyused by the HIV virus and destroying all zinc fingers in someone’s body could cause serious sideeffects. Some of the side effects that have been seen in patients taking ADA include kidney painand urine abnormalities. ADA may be re-formulated so that it can be taken in smaller doses toreduce side effects.61HGTV43 - Enzo Biochem Inc. (NYSE: ENZ) – Antisense DrugAntisense drugs work by mirroring part of the HIV genetic code. They are short pieces of nucleicacid that bind to specific parts of HIV’s genetic code. The drug locks on to the HIV virus andprevents it from functioning properly. HGTV43 has had good in vitro results and it is beginningPhase II trials. Solid efficacy has been shown in Phase I trials, and the drug seems to be welltolerated.62VRX496 – VIRxSYS – Gene TherapyGene therapy, as opposed to other anti-HIV techniques, targets an earlier stage of virusdevelopment. It interferes with the genetic processes by which HIV is made.HIV can be treated as a genetic disorder because it takes its own RNA and converts it to DNA theninserts it into the DNA of the infected cell. Through gene therapy scientists may be able to targetthe HIV genes in infected cells correcting it as if it were a genetic disorder.VRX496 is genetically modified to infect T-cells and attacks HIV's genetic code. It is in Phase Istudies. VRX496 can turn HIV against itself and is able to “cut” HIV’s genetic code. VRX496 mayserve as an alternative to HAART. It has been demonstrated to inhibit HIV replication b

One reason for the slow progress in AIDS vaccines is that scientists have never before faced thechallenge of developing vaccines that work by stimulating an immune response against a diseasethat actually destroys the immune system. Also, the HIV virus mutates at a very fast pace, whichoutmaneuvers potential vaccines. Furthermore, different parts of the world show different strains ofAIDS, which might require different vaccines.However, experimental HIV/AIDS vaccines have proven effective to varying degrees in stringentanimal model tests that use virus challenges that are significantly higher than what is believed tooccur in most human exposures. Individuals who become infected with HIV do not succumb to thedisease for years even in the absence of anti-retroviral therapy, suggesting that the human immunesystem is capable of controlling HIV infection partially or temporarily.To combat the different issues facing an HIV vaccination, scientists are combining differentvaccines. Many are currently in testing including: canarypox plus gp120 (Phase III); DNA plus MVA(Phase II); recombinant adenovirus plus canarypox (Phase I); canarypox plus lipopeptides (PhaseI); and DNA plus protein (Phase I); Chiron’s (NasdaqNM: CHIR) clade B DNA+novel envelopevaccine (Phase 1); and DNA+fowlpox clade B vaccine (Phase 1) of the University of South Wales.Some researchers anticipate that in developing countries between the years 2005 and 2010 some44,000 people will participate in approximately five Phase II/B and Phase III trials of AIDS vaccin

RepliconsIn recent years, a number of research teams have created virus-like particles that contain unrelatedgenetic material, called 'replicons'. These are formed by using a carrier, or 'source' virus to take thegenetic material of an unrelated virus into a cell. Replicons have the same physical properties asviruses, including the ability to enter cells of specific kinds, but they cannot reproduce themselves.When it comes to HIV vaccines, the three leading replicon systems are now based on alphavirusescalled Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) and Semliki forest virus (SFV), and an unrelated viruscalled adeno-associated virus (AAV).

PEPTIDE VACCINESInstead of vaccinating with a whole protein, another approach is to use a fragment of a protein,called a peptide, which consists of a few amino acids. A vaccine containing the V3 sequences fromseveral strains of HIV has been used in animals and produced antibodies able to neutralize severallaboratory-adapted virus strains. Another more novel way of using a particular peptide, identified asthe target for a broadly active neutralizing antibody against HIV, is to express it on the surface ofthe common cold virus. This allows the generation of a range of different varieties and the selectionof those that give the strongest immune responses. Synthetic peptides can be linked to lipidmolecules to facilitate induction of cell-mediated immune responses. Peptides can be combined asmulti-peptide vaccines as a strategy for increasing the breadth of the vaccine-induced response.67Product NamePhase

REGULATORY PROTEINSSeveral groups of researchers have been investigating the use of HIV proteins other than theenvelope proteins in vaccines. Most attention has been given to the structural (e.g. Gag) andregulatory proteins (e.g. Tat, Nef) produced by HIV. The regulatory protein Tat is produced earlyafter a cell is infected with HIV, which means that cellular immune responses may destroy infectedcells before they have a chance to release more virus particles. A further advantage of thisapproach is that Tat is vital to the functioning of HIV and seems to vary little between different HIVsubtypes. The Nef protein is also of interest, despite the fact that some HIV strains can infect andcause disease without it. If cellular immune responses target cells expressing Nef, they could selectfor less virulent viruses.68

BACTERIAL DELIVERY OF DNAAs DNA vaccines are grown inside bacteria, it may be possible to use the bacteria themselves as thevaccine. Immune responses can be induced to DNA plasmids included in weakened vaccine strainsof such bacteria as Salmonella and Shigella, which usually infect humans via the oral route andinduce strong mucosal immune responses If this strategy succeeds, it opens the way to an oralvaccine.Product NamePhaseDescriptionManufacturerGTU-MultiHIV B cladePhaseI/IIGTU®MultiHIV B clade, DNA based vaccine containing a nakedDNA plasmid. Antigens: nef, rev, tat, gag, pol, env, CTL epitopes.FIT Biotech(source: the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative (IAVI) website)OTHER VECTORSOf the other viral vectors being studied with HIV, measles is of particular interest. The liveattenuated measles vaccine in common use is extremely effective in generating long-lastingimmune responses when given to infants, which can be boosted in adolescents. This might be idealto protect young people in countries where HIV is widespread.NEW FRONTIERSRecently, a novel system to develop and screen for potential vaccines has been developed. Theprocess is known as “Molecular Breeding” and was developed by Maxygen Inc. (NasdaqNM:MAXY). The process consists of placing chopped up viral sequences in a test tube. The genefragments then express their corresponding proteins. This enables researchers to select the proteinswith desired properties, such as the ability to bind strongly to a particular HIV antibody. Theselected sequences are then used to start the whole process over again. In time this can producevirus gene sequences that illicit an even stronger immune response.Page 4645VACCINE-LIKE TREATMENTSPEHRG214 – VirionyxScientists are also attempting to stimulate the immune system using a genetically engineered groupof antibodies to HIV similar to a vaccine. It will be administered to patients who currently areinfected with the HIV virus. PEHRG214 uses antibodies from immunized goat plasma to targetportions of the HIV virus that are not recognized by the human immune system but are readilyrecognized by goat immune systems. PEHRG214 may also be referred to as a “passive immuno-therapeutic pharmaceutical” and is currently in a Phase II trial.69DermaVir® - Research Institute for Genetic & Human Therapy (RIGHT)DermaVir® is a novel therapeutic vaccine that is applied to the skin. It is the least invasive ofantiviral treatment and can be administered as little as 8 times a year. It is in Phase I trials. Theinfrequent dosing, high viral suppression and low toxicity profile make DermaVir® very appealing topatients. It also appears to prevent viral rebound. DermaVir® will most likely be used along withstandard HAART treatments.70VIR201- Virax Holdings Limited (ASX: VHL)VIR201, in Phase I/IIa trials, uses DNA vaccine technology called Co-X-Gene. This vaccine carries afake virus onto which HIV and human genetic material have been grafted. The vaccine stimulatesthe HIV-specific immune response to fight the HIV virus. This vaccine will be helpful in people withlow levels of HIV in their blood because it will help them to continue fighting the virus even whenthe body would normally stop

I dont doubt that companies are competing worldwide to develop the magic serum but I must caution some not to fully rely on a cure being developed as soon as people would hope.

Its basically like being skeptical but cautiously optimistic. I was told by well respected researchers and HIV docs not to expect a cure but to live you're life as if there was never going to be one.

So instead of being sadly disappointed and wasting precious energy you wont be surprised if one isn't developed but if something is developed then you can be surprised but not so much to affecting you're quality of life worrying or living a roller coaster life when their are setbacks in research.

check out all these exciting new breakthroughs that are being announced at conferences this weekmany many huge advances, DAPY compounds that block all resistant versions of the virus. (this discovery could have been in nature magazine a year ago or science but editors said it was not broad enough) this is huge huge stuff

Dr Wohl, in your recent podcast interview, you mentioned a recent study that was done to try to find out the "cost of HIV treatment". A side effect of this study was that the study came up with an "average lifespan" number of 24.2 years based on current treatments and starting treatment around the current US guidelines of CD4~350/15%.

This seems to be in conflict with the CDC's June 2005 update. Which states that there are about 1.1 million Americans who are HIV positive (between 1 and 1.2 million). The 18,000 annual AIDS deaths would be only 1.6% of this population. This means an annual remainder of 98.4%. A simple calculation (.984^43=.50) shows that at this rate of attrition it would take about 43 years on average for the HIV positives to die from AIDS (i.e. for half of them to succumb to one of the 30 or so old diseases that are called AIDS if the patient is HIV positive).

I guess I'm finding it hard to understand the discrepancy in the two sets of numbers...

I understand that there are many many factors that go into these kind of "statistics", with the most important among these being how variable each individual person responds to the particular strain and subsequent mutations of their virus.

I also understand that many of these "lifespan" numbers are just statistical mathematics, which covers things like averages of averages, etc.

To help understand this on a more personal level, can you tell me if I'm understand the following facts correctly (understanding that each one assumes "responds well"):

1) Based on current guidelines, treatment should start (and not see "interruptions") roughly around CD4<(350/15%), especially if the VL is High (>100,000)

2) Those that have a "non-resistant" strain and maintain strict compliance with their treatment plan can HOPE to see VL become undetectable and see CD4 rise over time.

3) Those that start treatment around 350 and respond well could hope to see CD4 rise upwards of approx 500 with a few responding so well as to near the level of 800 (which is the lowest range of "normal").

4) Those that see VL not reaching undetectable are probably facing some amount of drug resistant strains of the virus in their system.

5) Those that reach undetectable VL, but don't see increases in CD4 may be experiencing a deeper level of infection of Latent HIV Reservoirs (marrow, brain, & CD4 "stem cells" that are infected) such that while not contributing new virus to the bloodstream, those long lived cells are passing HIV via normal stem cell mitosis and subsequent differentiation, meaning that the resulting "new" CD4 cells are often short lived and may not reach maturity in a beleaguered Thalamus.

6) People don't die from HIV, they die from Opportunistic Infections and basically what amounts to long term treatment toxicities. It's this one that I'm finding a degree of conflicting information around.

6a) Would it be correct to say that "Age", and thus lifespan, is predominately an effect of a cell's ability to maintain healthy mitacondria? We age because as the mitacondria in our cells replicate both oxidation as well as generational "errors in replication" result in depletion of mitacondria as well as less "healthy" mitacondria over time.

6b) So with treatment while we might maintain "near healthy" CD4 levels and undetectable VL which can prevent most OIs, there is still the combination of HIV's direct effect on cells (increased Apoptosis) which when combined with mitacondrial depletion being caused by most of today's HIV medications, will still result in shorter lifespans than might be considered "normal"?

Response from Dr. Wohl

You raise many important points. It will be difficult to answer all of your excellent questions in detail as the text of such an answer would be the basis of a nice book reviewing much of what is known about HIV infection.

As far as the article I described in the podcast, the paper presented results generated from a computer simulation of a hypothetical cohort of patients starting therapy. It is not an accounting of what is happening now to the mix of HIV+ people who are at various stages of HIV infection and HIV treatment. The 24 year estimate is to be taken with a large grain of salt. The computer can not take into account everything that influences life expectancy. It also does not incorporate major advances in HIV care that I think are inevitable.

The bottom line regarding treatment is that current HIV therapy is potent and in the majority of patients will drive the viral load to very low levels, permitting growth of the T-cells. How long this lasts depends on many factors - treatment adherence and pre-treatment drug resistance being major factors. How high the T-cell count can go is very individual but generally those starting with a T-cell count of 200+ will see increases that approach or enter into the normal range.

At present, most all people with HIV infection should start therapy before the T-cell count drops below 350. If HIV is detected at a lower count, therapy should start right away. There are data suggesting starting HIV therapy at higher T-cell counts may be even better. We will see if this translates into a tendency to initiate therapy even sooner in the course of infection - I think it might.

The causes of death among people with HIV are less and less related to opportunistic infections (in the US and Europe, at least). Liver disease, typically as a result of hepatitis, is a major cause of death as are cancers - some of which may be arguably related to immunosuppression from HIV but also from increasing age of those with HIV. Infections are a problem mostly in those with really low T-cell counts. Cardiovascular disease also accounts for some deaths among HIV+ folks, but this is also the major cause of death among people living in the US, Canada and Europe. The contribution of HIV therapy to heart disease developing among people living with HIV, so far, seems to be low.

There is more to life, and death, than mitochondria.

In short, HIV therapy is good. All the data we have so far demonstrates that HIV meds prolong life - how long we just do not know at this point. There are side effects of these meds but it looks like the side effects of HIV itself trump these and are more life-threatening to more people. Starting HIV therapy before the T-cell count declines below 350 is beneficial. Taking meds that are potent and active against the virus an individual harbors and taking them as directed reduces the risk of their failure.

Within the next 5 years I expect that there would be almost side effect less drugs.Within the next 10 years I expect that there would be a cell that can replicate itself to destroy active HIVWithin the next 15 years I expect that a complete cure would be found

From a theoretical point of view (it's, of course, too early to consider it seriously at this point), it's interesting to wonder what the world (at least the developed world, and assuming that everyone who needs the cure/vaccine gets it) will be like when HIV is cured or at least suppressed for good through therapeutic vaccination. In addition to the expected euphoria, there will probably be more disinhibition-lots more people throwing caution to the wind and having unprotected sex as if it were 1975 (despite the existence of many other STIs).There will also have to be retraining/reorientation of a lot of medical and social services professionals who have built their lives, practices, and organizations around HIV and HIV-positive people.And then, not least of all, there will be a lot of psychological and emotional stuff to deal with as people who have spent decades fighting a physically and mentally draining, serious, stigmatized, highly political disease are suddenly off meds and expected to "just get on with their lives." Will there be resources to deal with this?As I said, it's too early to argue this seriously, but it kind of makes you wonder. Needless to say, I hope the day comes sooner than many of us think.

Yeah - I think that's a really interesting point. I mean I love the science, but what would the world look like without HIV. How would we all cope? I think this site would have to keep running for a while, for us all to swap stories and reminisce.

I'm planning on going into HIV medicine when I'm qualified - I can't imagine a happier way of being made unemployed. I'll just have to work on some other nasty virus.

Personally, if I was cured I would either bareback only in a committed relationship or have rigorously safe sex. Who knows what nasty virus might emerge next? There was only a 50 year gap between syphillis being curable (from being a major killer/maimer) overnight and the advent of HIV. So there's normally something incurable lurking around... And the people that catch it first die, like with HIV.